|Help

The Convenient Myth of David and Goliath in Treaty Arbitration - WAMR 2009 Vol. 3, No. 4-5

Author(s): 
Lucy F. Reed
Lucy Martinez
Page Count: 
22 pages
Media Description: 
PDF from "World Arbitration and Mediation Review (WAMR)"
Published: 
December, 2011
Jurisdictions: 
International
Practice Areas: 
Commercial Disputes,
Investment Disputes,
ICSID,
Arbitrability
Author Detail: 

Lucy Reed and Lucy Martinez practice international arbitration in the New York office of
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer US LLP. This article contains their personal
views and not necessarily the views of other lawyers in the firm. This article is
based on a presentation by Lucy Reed at the ITA-ASIL conference held in
Washington, D.C. on March 25, 2009.

 

PDF298.71 KB

$40.00
Description: 

Originally from World Arbitration And Mediation Review (WAMR)

Preview Page

 

THE CONVENIENT MYTH OF DAVID AND

GOLIATH IN TREATY ARBITRATION
Lucy Reed and Lucy Martinez*

I. INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
The concept or conceit of “David and Goliath” in investmenttreaty
arbitration is not new.1 It was used by Karl Heinz
Böckstiegel in his 2006 Clayton Utz lecture, and the image readily
comes to mind of Goliath, the State, inviting the investor in,
controlling the resources, laws, courts, and police, and
expropriating or regulating the investor – poor little David – to
distraction.2 But, hark, David pulls out his slingshot of arbitration
before the International Centre for Settlement of Investment
Disputes (ICSID) and brings the State to its knees.